» Articles » PMID: 12237625

Hysteroscopic Transcervical Endometrial Resection Versus Thermal Destruction for Menorrhagia: a Prospective Randomized Trial on Satisfaction Rate

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2002 Sep 19
PMID 12237625
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the satisfaction rate and the effectiveness of transcervical hysteroscopic endometrial resection and thermal destruction of the endometrium in the treatment of menorrhagia.

Study Design: A prospective randomized trial with 2 years of follow-up was carried out in the Department of Gynecology of the University of Naples. Eighty-two patients who were affected by menorrhagia that was unresponsive to medical treatment were respectively randomized to transcervical hysteroscopic endometrial resection or to thermal destruction of the endometrium. Satisfaction rate, operative time, discharge time, complication rate, reintervention rate, and resumption of normal activity were evaluated in each group.

Results: The satisfaction rate was significantly higher in the thermal destruction group. Operative time was significantly shorter in the thermal destruction group (24 +/- 4 minutes vs 37 +/- 6 minutes). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the thermal destruction group (7.2 +/- 2.8 mL vs 89 +/- 38 mL). Reintervention rates were higher in the transcervical hysteroscopic endometrial resection group, although postoperative pain was not significantly different between the two groups. Discharge time, complication rate, and resumption of normal activity were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusion: Thermal destruction of the endometrium for the treatment of menorrhagia should be considered an effective therapeutic option because of its acceptability among patients, shorter operative time, and lower blood loss.

Citing Articles

First and second-generation endometrial ablation devices: A network meta-analysis.

Marchand G, Masoud A, Grover S, King A, Brazil G, Ulibarri H BMJ Open. 2024; 14(5):e065966.

PMID: 38806429 PMC: 11138282. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065966.


Short-term recovery after NovaSure® endometrial ablation: a prospective cohort study.

Reinders I, van de Kar M, Geomini P, Leemans J, Maas J, Bongers M Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2023; 14(4):299-307.

PMID: 36724421 PMC: 10364340. DOI: 10.52054/FVVO.14.4.042.


Variation of outcome reporting in studies of interventions for heavy menstrual bleeding: a systematic review.

Cooper N, Papadantonaki R, Yorke S, Khan K Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2022; 14(3):205-218.

PMID: 36206795 PMC: 10350948. DOI: 10.52054/FVVO.14.3.030.


Interventions for heavy menstrual bleeding; overview of Cochrane reviews and network meta-analysis.

Bofill Rodriguez M, Dias S, Jordan V, Lethaby A, Lensen S, Wise M Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022; 5:CD013180.

PMID: 35638592 PMC: 9153244. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013180.pub2.


Comparison of Bipolar Ball Endometrial Ablation and Transcervical Resection of the Endometrium in the Treatment of Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Subbaiah M, Selvest N, Maurya D Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2021; 10(3):143-147.

PMID: 34485057 PMC: 8384028. DOI: 10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_88_20.